Abstract
The Emerging Infectious Disease (EID) crisis has been challenging global
health security for decades, dealing substantial damage to all
socio-economic landscapes. Control measures have failed to prevent or
even mitigate damages of an accelerating wave of EIDs, leading to the
emergence and devastation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. In the wake
of the pandemic we must critically review our public health policies and
approaches. Current health security measures are based on the
evolutionary theorem of host-parasite coevolution, which falsely deems
EIDs are rare and unpredictable. The DAMA protocol is nested in a novel
evolutionary framework describing how emergence can be prevented before
the onset of an outbreak. In this paper, we discuss the importance of
establishing efficient communication channels between various
stakeholders affected by EIDs. We describe implementation strategies of
preventive interventions on global, regional and local scales, and
provide guidelines for using such strategies in relevant policy
environments of human, livestock and crop diseases.
Keywords : Infectious disease, EID prevention, DAMA protocol,
policy implementation, Living Labs, Citizen Science
The Crisis of Emerging
Infectious Diseases
The past decades have seen a striking rise in the number of Emerging
Infectious Diseases (EIDs) across the globe, whether it meant known
diseases appearing in previously unknown areas (e.g. West Nile Virus,
Diphtheria, Measles), new variants becoming resistant to treatment (e.g.
malaria, MRSA) or completely novel pathogens infecting novel hosts (e.g.
SARS, African Swine Fever, Phytoplasma). With the ever increasing rate
of globalisation, international trade and travel, EIDs had spread faster
than ever before in human history, resulting in a staggering $1
Trillion USD/year for containment costs and production losses before
2020 (1). This figure was
further elevated by the recent COVID-19 pandemic, which resulted in one
of the largest economic recessions since the mid-1900s
(2,3). A more
significant reason for concern is that the damages in both economic
production and human life was highest in the United States and United
Kingdom whose healthcare system was announced to have been best prepared
for such an event
(4,5). These
controversial patterns highlight the dissonance between how we try to
control EIDs and what we should be focusing on instead.
As is the case with most epidemics, important conclusions are drawn from
each case after the fact which should lead to better preparedness for
the next such event. However, our investments into disease control and
surveillance methods have neither been able to even slow down, let alone
stop the acceleration of the EID crisis thus far, nor prevent the
COVID-19 pandemic. To understand why our efforts have not been
efficient, we must understand what the requirements and limitations of
current disease management strategies are, and identify the gaps which
allow for new diseases to emerge.